Trump vs Biden 2020, Day 64 of the Pennsylvania count (pt 5) Read OP

eagle eye

joe40 wrote:

If this was just a ridiculous Trump nonsense backed up by Guiliani and a few other clowns it would be a humorous distraction, nothing more.
But the court cases taken by Texas against other states show the corrosive and dangerous side of Trumpism. His support is significant, worryingly so.

Texas shouldn't be meddling in the affairs of other states and it'll come back to haunt them. You can be sure if that.
I can imagine these states getting together to set up an enterprise fund to rivals that of Texas. There'll definitely be some sort of payback.

joe40 wrote:

I think we tend to think of Trump as a Gemma O'Doherty type loon (which he is) the difference is Trump has a lot of support in the US while Gemma is just a joke here with a handful of followers.

I never thought of him that way, far too much money around him and too many allegiances with rich, evil people.

joe40 wrote:

Trump might eventually go away but his caustic legacy is here to stay.

It's about taking it out of the media. For sure there'll be a group left behind but they depend on media to keep numbers up and the funds pouring in.

PropJoe10

eagle eye wrote: »

I disagree, we'll have a good man in the oval office who I believe can unite the nation.
If all the major networks stop giving air time to Trump then the numbers following him will dwindle.
I'd be very hopeful that by next summer very few will he talking about him, unless of course he's facing charges.

I think that's all wishful thinking. No matter what, Trump is absolute box office for right-wing media, which has been backed up by his election result (75 million votes). There's no way that he won't get airtime. And Trump airtime can only mean destruction for the future of the country.

The inevitable slapdown by the SCOTUS of this new lawsuit will only drag them into the "deep state" mud. And you need to bear in mind that a large, large percentage of the population believe everything that Trump says. He's systematically destroying belief in the institutions of the country and there's really nothing that's going to stop that.

Overheal

Trump sure doesn’t want you seeing this video boasting about their ties to China

https://twitter.com/funder/status/1337048230421520390?s=21

ChikiChiki

ChikiChiki wrote: »

Still has not copped the Irish lad in Germany changing his twitter handle.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1336678973980487681

Trump also seemed to be suggesting he was getting the vaccine to Germany. That would be the one developed in Germany, with German funding by the German company BioNtech, or the one developed by Oxford Astra-Zeneca in the UK?

eagle eye

eagle eye wrote: »

I disagree, we'll have a good man in the oval office who I believe can unite the nation.
If all the major networks stop giving air time to Trump then the numbers following him will dwindle.
I'd be very hopeful that by next summer very few will he talking about him, unless of course he's facing charges.

You couldn't trust Biden a short while ago

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=112905585&postcount=3434

"Yes, because I've seen Biden not in office do careless and clueless things. I've seen him on numerous occasions look like he is in the early throws of dementia too.
No way I could trust him"

The only way trump is going to be out of the news is when he's either jailed or dead, and even in both those cases ypu'll still hear about the crap he and his administration pulled

everlast75

Even more mishandling of COVID...


https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1337083764611182592?s=19

everlast75

everlast75 wrote: »

Even more mishandling of COVID...


https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1337083764611182592?s=19

Pretty much flagged as happening months ago, but at least on the record now.

ohnonotgmail

Trumps legal team made up quotes from cases they referenced. That is either gross incompetence or just plain fraud. Bar sanctions have to follow from this. at the very least the judge should hold them in contempt.

https://twitter.com/gabrielmalor/status/1336890693210533894

PropJoe10

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Trumps legal team made up quotes from cases they referenced. That is either gross incompetence or just plain fraud. Bar sanctions have to follow from this. at the very least the judge should hold them in contempt.

https://twitter.com/gabrielmalor/status/1336890693210533894

Can charges be brought against individuals or groups for continually wasting hours of court time, I wonder?

timsey tiger

eagle eye wrote: »

I disagree, we'll have a good man in the oval office who I believe can unite the nation.
If all the major networks stop giving air time to Trump then the numbers following him will dwindle.
I'd be very hopeful that by next summer very few will he talking about him, unless of course he's facing charges.

Is that you Lindsey Graham?

eagle eye

PropJoe10 wrote: »

Can charges be brought against individuals or groups for continually wasting hours of court time, I wonder?

Not as far as I'm aware, as pointed out in the post you quoted the judge could hold them in content.

everlast75

https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1337119761902276608?s=19

Overheal

PropJoe10 wrote: »

Can charges be brought against individuals or groups for continually wasting hours of court time, I wonder?

Are you kidding? Trump intends to pardon anyone who is guilty of defrauding the court, etc

Overheal

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1337119761902276608?s=19

FYI: the “laches” they mention refers to laches doctrine, tldr the idea you have a reasonable but limited time to file a genuine grievance. In this case, the laches would be that the complaints about the legality of state election changes only came after the winner of the election was clearly known - over a month after, and not when the changes were made, well before the election.

everlast75

After trump being nominated as a possible winner, he loses *again* to Joe and Kamala

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1337244908789190656?s=19

Rawr

everlast75 wrote: »

After trump being nominated as a possible winner, he loses *again* to Joe and Kamala

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1337244908789190656?s=19

I get the feeling that Trump will be far more annoyed by this, than with the election result.

Being on magazine covers seems to matter a lot to the guy :P

everlast75

Rawr wrote: »

I get the feeling that Trump will be far more annoyed by this, than with the election result.

Being on magazine covers seems to matter a lot to the guy :P

Of course.

What is a porn star going to use now to spank his ample fake tanned ass???

ExMachina1000

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2020/1211/1183765-time-award/

Joe Biden and harris have been named as Time person of the year.
The article mentions that Biden is the oldest presidential nominee and harrris is part African American.
It isn't clear if this is the reason why they won?

Other notable mentions were people who protested alongside blm.

Edit: They won because

The incoming US leaders won the honour for "changing the American story, for showing that the forces of empathy are greater than the furies of division, and for sharing a vision of healing in a grieving world", Time's editor-in-chief Edward Felsenthal said.

Fiery mutant

‘Your one’, ‘yer wan’ Harris. Why refer to her like that when you know her name? So childish.

ohnonotgmail

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2020/1211/1183765-time-award/

Joe Biden and Harris have been named as Time person of the year.
The article mentions that Biden is the oldest presidential nominee and Harris is part African American.
It isn't clear if this is the reason why they won?

Other notable mentions were people who protested alongside blm.

I can nearly taste the bitterness.

salmocab

They won because they got most votes. It’s their theme I think.

Smee_Again

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/world/2020/1211/1183765-time-award/

Joe Biden and harris have been named as Time person of the year.
The article mentions that Biden is the oldest presidential nominee and harrris is part African American.
It isn't clear if this is the reason why they won?

Other notable mentions were people who protested alongside blm.

Edit: They won because

The incoming US leaders won the honour for "changing the American story, for showing that the forces of empathy are greater than the furies of division, and for sharing a vision of healing in a grieving world", Time's editor-in-chief Edward Felsenthal said.

Whoever wins the US Presidential election is odds on to be Time person of the year.

Since 1992 who won has been person of the year except Clinton in 1996.

ExMachina1000

Smee_Again wrote: »

Whoever wins the US Presidential election is odds on to be Time person of the year.

Since 1992 who won has been person of the year except Clinton in 1996.

Yes that's true. It's almost tradition. Does the incoming vp usually also win?

timsey tiger

eagle eye wrote: »

Not as far as I'm aware, as pointed out in the post you quoted the judge could hold them in content.

I think Trump is the only one in that state #DaiperDon

Smee_Again

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Yes that's true. It's almost tradition. Does the incoming vp usually also win?

Don't think so.

ExMachina1000

Smee_Again wrote: »

Don't think so.

Maybe a bit of tokenism for the year that's in it?

Smee_Again

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Maybe a bit of tokenism for the year that's in it?

Why would you say that?

First female VP.
First Person of Colour elected VP.
Part of the ticket to win the most votes in any Presidential Election ever.
Landslide victory against an incumbent President which is very rare, only 10 have lost in their re-election campaign.

I'm sure there's more that I could list those are just off the top of my head.

ohnonotgmail

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Maybe a bit of tokenism for the year that's in it?

or maybe she meets the criteria? you do know what the criteria is, right?

sydthebeat

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Maybe a bit of tokenism for the year that's in it?

Nah, that was trump in 2016

Christy42

Smee_Again wrote: »

Why would you say that?

First female VP.
First Person of Colour elected VP.
Part of the ticket to win the most votes in any Presidential Election ever.
Landslide victory against an incumbent President which is very rare, only 10 have lost in their re-election campaign.

I'm sure there's more that I could list those are just off the top of my head.

I would say that she has been far more involved than most VPs who are normally picked for safety. Kamala was always going to get more attention than the usual choice and so was a lot up front and center.